Talk:Durham, England/Archive 1

Naming convention discussion summarised and refactored to Talk:Durham (disambiguation)

I'm reverting Mav's change to the disamb block for this page. It's no big deal and I am hardly going to start an edit war over this, but, for the record, here is what I said to another user in response to a question about this very issue:

... Because I felt it needed a specific disambiguation type thing BEFORE the article started. The most common confusion, and I swear this is true having spent yonks (perhaps even gurt yonks) going through Durham-related articles, is between the English city and county, and if there was a risk this would cause confusion I was hoping to catch readers before they had to get into the article text. [...]

In other words I suppose I am claiming that dismabiguating the two English Durhams is a special case somewhat separate from the issue of all the other Durhams in NC and Queensland etc, and was trying to make provision for dealing with that in a helpful way.

Now, as I say, this isn't something over which I am going to lose sleep, but I thought this explanation in Talk might help to make it clear why I thought this minor change is worthwhile, even if at first sight it appears to be overdoing it. Happy Christmas or other seasonal, religious, etc festivity of your choice! Nevilley 12:13 Dec 25, 2002 (UTC)

It is suboptimal and redundant to have two links to Durham County so close to each other in the article (not to mention that Durham County is also linked form Durham (disambiguation)). If the term you are disambiguating from is very closely related to the term you have chosen an article to be on, then the most logical thing to do is use the first paragraph in the article itself to do the disambiguation. That is the format used in virus and for the French Departments which are named for rivers (see Loiret). The whole point of having disambiguation blocks that link to (disambiguation) pages is to keep it all on one unobtrusive line (lowest common denominator is a screen resolution of 800 pixels wide and standard font sizes). The current disambiguation block wraps to a second line. This isn't good. --mav

Life is too short for this argument, so I have removed it. Nevilley 00:28 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)

btw you mean County Durham, not Durham County. In telling you this I have just saved your life from being flailed to death with a black pudding if you ever come over here! :) Nevilley 01:10 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)

Opps! Mea culpa. :) --mav

I note recent edits to the pronunciation debating local vs RP pronunciation. I'm not very good with the IPA but as far as I can see it seems to be claiming the local pronunciation is "duh-rum" and the RP pronunciation is "derr-um". To be honest I would contest this. I believe it is 'correctly' and all-but-exclusively pronounced "duh". The only time I have ever actually heard it pronounced with an open "derr" is by American tourists saying "Derr-Ham", who are simply incorrect, a la "Edinberg". Whilst I can conceivably imagine an extremely posh English person saying "Derr-um", I would suggest this would be outright acrolect, not RP. (For example, and FWIW, my own accent is RP, and I said "duh-rum" long before I moved here). A small and ultimately trivial point though :) Stevekeiretsu 16:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure it is saying it's pronounced derr-um. Of course it's always difficult to discuss pronunciations without symbols (i.e. using the pro-nun-see-ay-shuns method), but I'll have a go. As I understand it, the ʌ is the sound in "run" or "bud" or "enough" or "cup", as pronounced by most people in the southern half of England, and not extremely posh ones. I would tend to represent this sound as "uh" if trying to spell it out, with the caveat that it's definitely a short vowel. Many more northerly pronunciations tend to merge the vowels in words like "good" and "cup", which are definitely distinct when I say them, and the ʊ in the local pronunciation bit is something like the vowel in "good" as spoken by the same southerners I used in the example above. I'm fairly sure the vowel I hear in many local pronunciations of Durham is somewhat more close than my southern version (and my accent couldn't really be described as acrolect or posh), which would tend to support this, but then I could be getting my terminology all confused. I think perhaps we need an expert to cast their eye over it and see what they think. We all know how these things are pronounced, it's just representing it in IPA that can pose a problem. Would you say your pronunciation of Durham uses the exact same vowel as the local pronunciation? Have a listen to this (ʊ) and this (ʌ). These are the vowels the article is currently claiming, local and RP respectively (but shorter than those sound samples). — Trilobite (Talk) 17:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

No, my pronunciation isn't identical to a local pronunciation. I'd agree there is a difference, just by (total newcomer) reading of the charts in the linked IPA article, it seemed like the difference wasn't quite captured quite right. Judging by what you're saying above, I was just misreading the IPA charts, which isn't at all surprising! I would agree a Southerners pronunciation would equate to "cup" and local one more in the direction of a southern "good", so it looks like the error is mine :) Stevekeiretsu

I've lived in Durham City all my life, and I hate to drag up old arguments, but I think the "local" pronunciation is somewhat adrift from that at the top of the article. I firstly think the "r" is an Alveolar approximant (ɺ) which is common throughout County Durham, not quite an RP "r", but obvious in words like "terror". Secondly, the vowel sound is very much different from the one currently used in the article. My personal opinion is that it is almost always realised as open-mid central unrounded vowel (ɜ).

Haha, I like the distinction between "local" and "RP" pronounciation. Durham City itself (the city and not the district council area) has a very high proportion of residents with RP accents (the majority even?). Thus, I think the "local"/"RP" is a non-starter. Personally, I can't see much difference in pronounciation between the "local" (like myself) and the "RP" version. Logica 02:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I just want to mention that the symbol (ɺ) used right now is with an alveolar lateral flap... not quite the "r" (which is closer to an alveolar approximant, represented with ɹ) that most English speakers are used to hearing. That sound is more like the r/l of Japanese. So, unless the local pronunciation sounds a bit like "dull-um" then I think that the symbol ought to change. I am, however, in no way any kind of knowledgeable person on the actual pronuncation; I only know a bit about IPA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.253.135.206 (talk) 00:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Could someone please explain how the second phonetic symbol in this: /dʏrəm/ is meant to be pronounced - the one that looks like a Y - I can't find it on any IPA charts. It seems to me that the pronunciation listed as "RP" is the same as the actual "local" pronunciation. Further to which, I have heard the word "Durham" spoken by people with both "local" and southern/"RP" accents, and there isn't really any difference. I would like to suggest removing the Local/RP pronunciation difference from the top of the article and just putting /dʌræm/ since this is how everybody seems to pronounce the word. However if someone can explain how /dʏrəm/ is pronouned I might change my mind on this. --Tangent747 (talk) 10:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:IPA - ʏ is the near-close near-front rounded vowel pronounced as in "book". Possibly ʊ̜ would be similar. DWaterson (talk) 19:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, after a long time staring at IPA charts and saying "put" and "Duhram" to myself I think that /'dʊrəm/ might be a more accurate rendition of the pronunciation. But since people even within one region, and within "RP" (though RP speakers would claim otherwise) pronounce things slightly differently, it is really impossible to say what is correct for such a subtle difference as that between /'dʏrəm/ and /'dʌrəm/ and /'dʊrəm/.--Tangent747 (talk) 20:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

(Living locally for many years, but with no linguistic training.) Looking at IPA chart for English dialects I would suggest 'lexical set' "strut" as the general pronunciation of the first vowel sound. (So "run them to Durham" would rhyme at least its first vowel.) But the local accent can veer towards lexical set "foot". (So "put them in Durham" would rhyme, although the "put" must be imagined with a distinct generally Northern accent, not as an aristocrat's golfing "putter" ("patter"!). Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The recent changes are accurate. People from Wearside and eastern County Durham pronounce Durham with the same first syllable as in the word "Derry" (to rhyme with "berry"). This is a bit of a quirk. People from Tyneside and Yorkshire would indeed pronounce it as /dʊrəm/. But for locals to Durham the first syllable is like a short version of the one in RP "heard", "were", "bird", "further". Other words that get the same treatment from Wearsiders/eastern County Durham folk are "bury" (as in dig a hole -- pronounced identically to "berry"), borough, curd, curry, current, hurry, Surrey, slurry, thorough, worry, and so on. I would say this is one of the most distinctive aspects of Wearside/east Durham county pronunciation that sets it apart from Tyneside pronunciation. It only occurs when preceding an r. "Cut"/"put"/"duck" etc. of course are all with /ʊ/. Urantian in UK (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Is this pronunciation really quirky? For example "hurt", "blur", "fur" are all spelled with 'u' yet make the 'ɜ' sound. 'ur' in all positions, rhotic or not should be pronouced as 'ɜ'. 2.220.196.159 (talk) 20:36, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

What are people from Durham called? (ie Manchester = Mancunians) This should be added to the article.

I don't believe there is an accepted word for people from Durham. You could try Dunelmensians, but it's a bit silly. --Gareth Hughes 18:12, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, and I have lived here for 22 years, there is no specific term for people from Durham in common usage. The only term applied widely i believe is mackem, which generally means someone from Sunderland but I have found people from Durham are often called such by people from Newcastle and elsewhere (perhaps because of its siting on the river wear). When visiting another part of the country I tend to be called a geordie or mackem. Gazzapedia

Names for people from Durham do seem to vary, as it's not a word that lends itself easily to an adjective or noun form. However, the most usual and formal word is "Dunelmian", for example in that alumni of Durham School are known as Old Dunelmians. I have also heard "Durhamite" used informally in a modern context. However, I have never heard "Mackem" for a resident of Durham; that's strictly Sunderland only. DWaterson 00:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

The students tend to call the residents of Durham "Durhamites" as mentioned above. Obviously, quite a colloquialism, but one I am rather fond of I must say! It should be noted that this is not used in a derogatory way, quite the opposite, and is also sometimes used by the students to describe themselves. Somnia alondra 10:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Somnia alondra (talk • contribs) 10:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

Ex student here. Yes - students use Durhamite to refer to themselves. I'd say that anyone who lives in Durham can be a Durhamite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.184.195 (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the map the urban layout is quite odd. Most towns bear at least some relation to a circle in terms of size, but Durham is really, I dunno, stringy and clumby - is this because the Wear flood plain? This needs sourcing and putting in. Morwen - Talk 07:25, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

It's not the Wear flood plain as such, it's the shape of the steeply-sided valley the river Wear has cut over time. The city is based around a wide bow in the river, which forms a peninsula. The peninsula itself, on which the Cathedral and Castle stand, is on much higher land than the river, and is joined to the rest of the city only to the north (by the Market Place), or by bridge. Other than that, there is no flood plain really; indeed, in addition to the peninsula, Durham is a very hilly city: as List_of_cities_claimed_to_be_built_on_seven_hills attests, Durham is surrounded by hills which also restrict the street layout. Aside from the mediaval street pattern in the centre of the city, the more modern outlying estates have more typical street arrangements. I think the article already describes this fairly well though; much more expansion might make it overly wordy. DWaterson 00:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who has an interest in contributing to Durham related articles may like to look at the discussion going on at Talk:The Bailey Robdurbar 10:20, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I see there is now The Peninsula, Durham, which is described as the historic city center. For what it's worth, I have seen many references in articles to this city center, that are not linked to this article. A small project for someone there. --Una Smith (talk) 01:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Now I may be unobservant or just not know my history well but I don't recall Jesus of Nazareth ever having been a resident of Durham, yet he's got an entry in Durham's list of Famous Residents. An error, methinks? Snowflake Sans Crainte 19:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, why are Paul Collingwood and Steve Harmison listed as Famous Residents? As far as I can see Collingwood's from a different place within County Durham, while Harmison's from Northumberland. Under that assumption could we put Shakespeare as a famous resident of Warwick? KingStrato 11:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, Collingwood grew up in Shotley Bridge, some 13 miles away and now lives in nearby Medomsley. He has never lived in the City of Durham --Michaeltyne 15:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Who's Christopher Metcalfe? Suggest removal for NN. Letstalk 14:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Have done. There was no assertion of notability and google doesn't shed any light on the matter. DWaterson 19:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

The prison. It's not exactly a minor thing in Durham, though goodness knows most of us residents don't exactly think about it very often. It seems a shame that it's not only not mentioned on this page, but - unlike many HMPs - it doesn't have its own Wikipedia page. Having said which I'm loath to mention it because I don't actually know anything about it except where it is. So this is by way of a prod to people who might have more clue but might not have thought to mention it ... --JennyRad 20:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I don't much about it myself either though --Robdurbar 22:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes it does: Durham (HM Prison). I shall insert a relevant passage. DWaterson 11:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Have added a section about the prison and the history of judicial execution, which Durham was famous for in the C18th and C19th. --217.44.200.236 (talk) 21:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

"Durham has an airport, in name, the Durham Tees Valley Airport"

I didn't think this referred to the City, but to the County. I can't find any evidence that would distinguish whether it is referring to the County or the City - though obviously many people feel it refers to the City. Their website doesn't say anything about this either. If there is no evidence that it refers to Durham City, I think it is a bit much to put this in this article. Logica 02:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Both Newcastle Airport and Durham Tees Valley Airport lie approximately the same distance away from Durham - i.e. about 25 miles (actually 24 for DTV but I'm not sure of the exact figure for Newcastle). I'll add this instead of what was originally there. Logica 00:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to include the appropriate info on the closest air links in the transport section; it never really occured to me when I wrote that sentence that DTV is named for the county nor that Newcastle is equally close! Good work Stevekeiretsu 19:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I've just reverted an attempt to move this page to Durham, UK:

• 01:22, 1 April 2007 Feedyourkoalanow (moved Durham to Durham, UK: Disambiguation: There is a city named Durham with a much larger population.)

This seems a rather extensive change to make without any discussion, especially since having the page here seems to have been stable since the Beginning Of Time (well, 2002). Any thoughts? Shimgray | talk | 14:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the images about and cut a few out; there were too many, making the page cluttered. --Pretty Green (talk) 09:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Why doesn't "Durham" go automatically to a disamb page? I was looking on the page in the talk section but there wasn't a clear answer. I couldn't really follow the discussion either. I think there should be a disambig page since there are so many Durhams. Durham North Carolina should appear at the top as the most populous Durham. Durham NC was what I was looking for when I typed in Durham (incidientally). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.238.152.3 (talk) 22:38, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Durham should disambiguate. Durham, NC, USA has 5 times the population of the town in the UK, so directing to the british town automatically is far less than optimal Brianski (talk) 20:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Oppose: Durham (in County Durham) dates back roughly to 2000 BC, has fantastic historical features such as a castle and a cathedral and gave its name to many of the other Durhams around the world. While Durham North Carolina has a larger population, it only dates back to the mid-19th century. A mere 'new-comer' compared to Durham (County Durham). Therefore, Durham (County Durham) has earned its place at the top.-- Myosotis Scorpioides 23:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh come on. This isn't about right to the name, it's about practicality and usefulness for the readers. The only two comments I would make against this are: isn't Durham, North Carolina is often rendered as such, rather than just 'Durham' - so this would lend itself to a disambiguated title; the other point is that as Durham, UK has been at this article for so long, all links coming in are those refering specifically to this Durham. If we altered the set up, then there'd be a lot of links going to a disambiguation page, which is discouaged in Wikipedia's style guide. I'm fairly neutral on this proposal - actually as I type and think further about it, I come out more against it. I'd have a disambig page if I were starting the encyclopedia anew but we're not and this article has been here for 4/5 years without causing too many problems. But if we're discussing this lets make sure we focus on practicality and usability, not on who has the 'right' to the name. Pretty Green (talk) 08:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sometimes people even say "Raleigh-Durham" for Durham, North Carolina... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.22.197.50 (talk) 21:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Nobody says "Raleigh-Durham" when they mean Durham specifically. They might say "Raleigh-Durham" if they mean a larger area, but people actually from that region will always say "The Triangle" instead. Regardless, I think the word "Durham" to most English speakers is most associated with the city in North Carolina. The longer history of the English city notwithstanding, the fact is Durham, NC is five times as populous with about a quarter of a million residents. Simply being its namesake is not a good argument in itself: Should "Baltimore" redirect to Baltimore, County Cork rather than the city of 2 million in Maryland?

Personally, I think "Durham" should point directly to the North Carolinian city, but there are also reasonable arguments for the English city. Still, there are so many different Durhams, in addition to these two, I find it highly unlikely that most people looking for Durham and directed to this page are actually looking for this particular Durham. I suggest directing "Durham" to the disambiguation page. Strikehold (talk) 08:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Myosotis Scorpioides is quite correct. This is the original Durham and the one from which all the others have derived their name. The Baltimore comparison doesn't hold water as the Baltimore in Ireland isn't at all well known even in the UK. Added to this point is the fact that Durham is a World Heritage Site and home of the finest piece of Norman church architecture in the world. Ericoides (talk) 13:36, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Durham, in the state of North Carolina, in the United States of America, on the North American Continent was actually named for a physician, not the town in County Durham. — Mustang_DVS (talk | contribs) 21:45, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Syracuse is a disambiguation page instead of the original Syracuse. I think this should be revisited because Durham in England may be the original Durham, however not the most well-known or most referred-to.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.101.242 (talk • contribs)

How do you work out it's the most well known? I did a search on bing.com (I'd have done it on Google.com but for some reason it always redirected me to Google.co.uk, which prejudiced the results to the UK Durham). On bing (a US site), for Durham UK I got 8,900,000 results. For Durham USA I got 7,390,000 results. I suspect if you asked people in Germany, France, Scandinavia, Iran, Australia etc they would have heard of Durham UK before the USA one (it's just been there much, much longer (3000 years), and is world renowned for its architecture; there is simply no reason why people in Europe would have heard of Durham, NC, unless they were historians of tobacco or had some sort of link to Duke). "World renowned" means precisely what it says on the tin. Durham, NC is 156 years old and doesn't seem to be famous for anything in particular, except the two specialist things I mentioned (and even then...). Ericoides (talk) 06:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

(To Ericoides) That's because no one uses the term "Durham USA", and Americans don't really use the term "USA" much at all. For "Durham"-and-"NC", there are 14.8 million Google hits, while for "Durham"-and-"UK" search yields 7.96 million. Also, it doesn't matter what city is more historic or the namesake for which. What matters is that the link points to the most appropriate page for our readers. This isn't a discussion about which city is "better", and your derisive comments, although I'm sure they were tongue-in-cheek, were not really appropriate (he redacted the comment). This is an English-language encyclopedia, so what the majority of English speakers are looking for is supremely relevant (I'm not discounting continental Europeans or any others, and the English language web search favors Durham, NC).

As an aside, I also don't find the opinion of people in the UK really relevant to the status of a town in Ireland (original Baltimore). Syracuse, cited by the IP above, is a better example than I provided. There's no doubt that most people in North America would be looking for the New York city or university rather than the Sicilian city in that case. I see no evidence that shows that most people searching for simply "Durham" are actually looking for the English city. Strikehold (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion Strikehold. I see that I entered the wrong search terms. You may well be right. Apologies for my tongue-in-cheek and wholly inappropriate comments. Ericoides (talk) 07:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

[The following comments are taken from Talk:Durham, North Carolina as the relevant discussion took place there]

I agree. You've got to ask the allied question, what was I thinking when I entered the terms "Durham" and "UK"? No one would ever use the term "Durham UK". They just say "Durham". I'm starting to think that if people do actually say "Durham, NC", then it might be a piece of kindness to let them have an article entitled "Durham, NC"; it might avoid all the sorts of confusion to which you rightly have brought my attention. "Durham" might be reserved for the place that is actually called "Durham". Incidentally, whilst we are on the topic of towns and counties, my search for Lincoln and Lincolnshire returned 678,000 entries; imagine my surprise when I got 7,540,000 for Lincoln and UK! An ad hoc and wholly provisional guess is that counties don't mean as much here in Blighty as states do for you in the U.S., which on the one hand might explain why you are so touchingly attached to the "Durham, NC" thing, and on the other, why you founded the country in the first place all those years ago. Warm regards, Ericoides (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

You know, I thought the same thing the other day, and am now ambivalent on the matter. It occurred to me that someone looking for the American city might easily search for either "Durham" or "Durham, NC" or "Durham, North Carolina" as their first guess, but someone looking for the English city probably wouldn't think of searching for anything other than simply "Durham". For that reason, I don't think it's probably worth it to make people follow an extra link to get where they are going. Strikehold (talk) 17:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really up to speed on the protocols, precedents and rules for disambiguating, doubtless an enormous subject but one into which I don't really care to dip my feet. In this particular instance, with two such compelling and worthy claimants to the Durham page, it might be worth saying, 1. Durham UK got there first on Wiki and 2. ruling that a town with only one name (Durham; no one says Durham, County Durham) should have precedence over a town with an at-least-sometimes-used-and-not-completely ridiculous secondary name, Durham, NC. At the top of the Durham page we might help the casual reader with something along these lines:

For the U.S. city, see Durham, North Carolina

For all other uses, see Durham (disambiguation)

This way, people searching for Durham, NC, and alighting on the Durham UK page would only be one simple (as opposed to previously, one simple and one less-than-simple) click away from the page for which they are searching. A happy compromise? Ericoides (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

(un-indent) That's certainly fair, and probably the most satisfactory course. Like I said, I now realize it probably isn't best practice to make readers looking for the English Durham go to the North Carolinian Durham first. And having a hatnote at Durham going directly to Durham, North Carolina would save a step for readers looking for the American city. Strikehold (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I've added that to the Durham page. I like the way how in this city standoff, Durham, NC, has gained its own not-inconsiderable revenge by being the first thing that is mentioned on the Durham UK page. But they are twin towns, and twins can be like this. Ericoides (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the best solution. See Cambridge, where there is presumably more interest in both cities and it seems to have worked well there. --Pontificalibus (talk) 18:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Approve-This is what happens when you live in a country that's about the size of Michigan for most of your life and don't get outside your country (Durham, USA, LMAO!). Anyway, the points of making this a disambiguation page are the following.

1. Durham is a very common name for many common things, including the larger (Nearly 300 thousand person) city in North Carolina, the breed of wheat, and a breed of ox.

2: I'll meet your Caimbridge, UK and Caimbridge, MA and bring you Boston, Mass and Boston, UK. I'll also meet your Raleigh (Sir Walter) with the city (Nearly 400 thousand). For Raleigh, there's a disambiguation. Methinks Somebody's a bit Anglocentric. And to give point for the page to redirect to the North Carolina city, I give you Memphis, TN and Memphis, Egypt.

3:, when you search for Durham on Google, you get the larger, North Carolina city vs the tiny city in the UK

4:Most native English speakers are North American (Sorry, Asian Indian English is a patois, not a true dialect of the English language) and Durham to them is Durham, UK.

If I seem rude, well, if you have a limited world view and you're basing it in a country the size of Michigan, you deserve to be mocked. At least when us Americans do it, (And I use the term "American" and not "US People" because Jefferson coined the denononym for people in the USA before anybody claimed the term) we're doing it based on the fact that we're the 4th largest country in the world by landmass, third by population, and first by economy. We also span 6 time zones and two hemispheres. You're doing it in a country that's barely the size of my state. You may thank me for my blunt insight sooner than later. Oh, and Disambig for this page, leaning to Durham, NC moving to Durham per Memphis.

06:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ColdRedRain (talk • contribs)

WP:NPA please. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 12:05, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Methinks [[Chris Neville-Smith has a bit of a superiority complex. Grow up. Xtremerandomness (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2011 (UTC)